ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Evaluation of ChatGPT-5 responses to patient-centered questions on stromal vascular fraction for knee osteoarthritis: fair to good quality and content.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment of vaccine information accuracy across large language models.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe global burden of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (KOA) continues to grow, driving clinical interest in biological treatment options. Stromal vascular fraction (SVF), derived from adipose tissue, has gained attention as a potential therapy for KOA. As patients increasingly utilize large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT for health information, this study aimed to evaluate the patient-information quality and readability of AI-generated responses to a curated set of patient-centered questions on SVF therapy for KOA.
methodsThirty patient-centered questions were developed through literature review by two experts and then posed to ChatGPT-5 after asking it to answer from an orthopaedic specialist perspective. Responses from ChatGPT-5 were evaluated by four orthopaedic specialists using three quality instruments: DISCERN, NLAT-AI (assessing five domains: Accuracy, Safety, Appropriateness, Actionability, and Effectiveness), and the Mika et al. scoring system. Readability was assessed using five standard metrics.
resultsMean scores were as follows: DISCERN 44.61 ± 4.94 (Fair); for NLAT-AI domains, Accuracy 3.92 ± 0.50 (Good), Safety 3.23 ± 0.78 (Fair), Appropriateness 4.14 ± 0.32 (Good), Actionability 3.20 ± 0.67 (Fair), and Effectiveness 4.46 ± 0.35 (Excellent); NLAT-AI (Total/ sum of five domains) 18.95 ± 1.93 (Good); Mika et al. 2.45 ± 0.49 (Fair). Readability metrics indicated an 11th to 12th grade reading level.
conclusionChatGPT-5 provides fair-to-good quality responses to patient-centered questions about SVF in KOA. The answers are generally effective and clinically appropriate, with good accuracy, and often require only limited additional clarification. However, safety cautions and practical guidance are less consistently covered, and the reading level is relatively high. Further research is needed to clarify its role as an adjunct tool for patient education in this setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.